Contrary to expectation, many atheist member organizations or many groups that allegedly represent free thinkers were quick to jump on the Judeo-Marxist bandwagon and dissociate themselves from me, simultaneously demonstrating hypocrisy or rejection of principles of freedom of religion and freedom of speech or freedom to criticize the religion of Judaism. To put it another way, those groups hold that it is OK to criticize Christianity but not Judaism or its influences on American society. The Atheist Law Center held no such sacred cows or taboos… (it gets much worse).

The good news is that Larry Darby appears to be a Christian:

I agree with moral precepts put forth by Jesus of Nazareth and I am Christian in a sense that Jesus of Nazareth would approve.

Larry Darby might just be the most nutball of the nutballs I have profiled over the years. I will have to watch this one very closely. He might just be the clock tower breed of nutball. You never really know.

1 comment:

Gilbert De Bruycker
said...

What about all those becoming atheists, but incompletely, since they retain in their minds the residue of that religion without being aware of it?They emancipate themselves from belief in overtly supernatural beings and reject tales about such impossible events as virgin births, walking on water, resurrection of the dead, but they never ponder the equally absurd social superstitions that were authorized by, and depend on, the god whose existence the tales about impossible events were devised to prove!

Those would-be atheists retain so much of a residue of Christianity in their minds that they are apt to flop over into leftist liberalism. It dispenses with gods but retains all of the religion they think they are rejecting.In place of traditional Christianity, they adopt an ersatz Christianity and, forgetting their atheism, have an emotional and unreasoning faith in their new religion with its millenarian belief in a future of happiness and justice where all give according to their ability and receive according to their needs [Acts 4:35],

Their revolt against Western civilization differs in only a few unessential trimmings from the subversion practised as "social gospel" in the great majority of Christian churches today. They retain in their minds the Christian residue that makes them susceptible to drivel about "all mankind," "One World," and the "humanitarian" sentimentality of do-gooders. So many of the Liberal's political ideas are religious at root - a secular, political extension of traditional religious frameworks. The search for equality in the secular sense is a replacement of the Judaeo-Christian idea that God loves every individual equally.

Universalist religionists and Marxists and most Humanists have a religious conviction that poetic metaphors such as "the brotherhood of Man" in which "there is neither Greek nor Roman, Jew nor Gentile, circumcised or uncircumcised, we are all one in Christ Jesus", are to be taken and used literally. They are unwitting functionaries in the creation of a New World Order of mixed-up peoples and centralized power.

The future development of quality of life of the peoples of Western countries are threatened qualitatively and quantitatively by non-Western immigration, that universalist dogma welcomes and the globalist establishment and its media bars warning against.

Our confidence in secular "truths" should be suspect because they arose in connection with the concept of God! For Hegel, the French Revolution - with its 'liberty, equality, fraternity' triad - was the political realization of an ideal that first took form in religious imagination. Political developments in this way are the concrete expression of religious ideals. The Enlightenment was not a break with religion; its secular movement was the realization of a vision that in the past had been located in a transcendent realm and postponed for an afterlife.